Kolkata Court July 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
United India Insurance Co Ltd Vs. Ai Champdany Industries Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
1 ORDER SHEET GA No.2170 of 2014 APOT No.345 of 2014 AP No.672 of 2014 -AndGA No.2171 of 2014 APOT No.346 of 2014 AP No.673 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO LTD Versus AI CHAMPDANY INDUSTRIES LIMITED BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE, The Hon'ble JUSTICE ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 17th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Chandan Kumar Lal with Mr.Jayanta Kumar Pain Ld. Advocates for the appellant. Mr.Sabyasachi Chowdhury, Mr.Abhijit Guha Roy Ld. Advocates for the respondent. The Court :- The respondent made an insurance claim. The Insurance Company settled the claim and offered the amount in full and final settlement that the respondent did not accept giving rise to a dispute that was referred to arbitration. The Arbitral Tribunal published an interim award awarding the same, which the Insurance Company originally offered in full and final settlement. The Insurance Company objected to the said interim...
Sisir Banerjee Vs. Shrimati Sujata Sengupta
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
ORDER SHEET APD1552011 TS32006 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE SISIR BANERJEE Versus SHRIMATI SUJATA SENGUPTA BEFORE: The Hon'ble MR.BANERJEE, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE The Honble Jusitce ARIJIT BANERJEE Date : 17th July, 2014. Mr.S.N.Sanyal, Advocate Ms.Lovely Ghosh, Advocate for the appellant. Mr.Sakya Sen, Advocate Ms.Nilanjana Adhya, Advocate Mr.Supratim Basu, Advocate for the respondent. The Court : The testatrix, Bakul Banerjee, was a spinster. She was having her own house at AB-124, Salt Lake City, Sector-1, Calcutta 700 064 where she breathed her last. She had three brothers and one married sister. She had her mother surviving her. The mother subsequently died. She bequeathed her property and all her assets to her sister Smt.Sujata Sengupta. She made Sadhan Ranjan Banerjee as the executor who subsequently declined to act. Out of three brotheRs.two subsequently came to this Court and prayed for condonation of delay in lodging the caveat. Such...
Rajat Bose Vs. Shoma Patronobis
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2570 of 2013 CS No.65 of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE RAJAT BOSE Versus SHOMA PATRONOBIS alias Chowdhury alias Chatterjee alias Banerjee BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Utpal Majumder, Adv.Mr.Sanjoy Bose, Adv.Ms.Tannistha Lahiri, Adv.For the petitioner. The Court :- In a suit seeking money decree and declaration and injunction the present application was made. The case of the plaintiff was that the defendant gave an undertaking to this Court in a suit in which the defendant was a party being Suit No.160 of 1997. The undertaking of the defendant of such suit was as follows:6.1. The said amount of Rs.9,00,000/- has been provided by Mr.Rajat Bose of No.24B Shakespeare Sarani, Kolkata 700 017 and the defendant hereby undertakes to this Honble Court not to sell transfer alienate, let out or part with the possession of the said Flat without the written consent of Mr.Ra...
Works Accountants of India and anr. Vs. State of West Bengal and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET WP No.359 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE THE INSTITUTE OF COSTS AND WORKS ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ANR. Versus STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 16th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Arindam Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.S.C.Prasad, Adv.The Court : The writ petition is directed against an order passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal on 17th September, 2008 affirming an order passed by the Regional Provident Fund Commissioner in connection with the proceeding initiated under Section 14-B of the Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner in the said proceeding had determined a sum of Rs.11,50,739/- as the amount due and payable on account of interest and damages for the period 4th quarter, 1991 to 12th quarter, 1998. During the pendency of the proceeding. It appears that a representation was made to the Regional Provident...
Southern Road Carriers Limited Vs. Jai Balaji Industries Limited
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
Form No.J.(2) IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present : The Honble Acting Chief Justice Ashim Kumar Banerjee And The Honble Justice Arijit Banerjee A.P.O.No.183 of 2014 C.P.No.659 of 2013 Southern Road Carriers Limited versus Jai Balaji Industries Limited For the Appellants : Mr.S.N.Mookherjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Ratnanko Banerjee, Senior Advocate Mr.Shaunak Mitra, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Senior Advocate Mr.Jishnu Chaudhuri, Advocate Mr.Soumabha Ghose, Advocate Ms.Rajashree Kajaria, Advocate Heard on : July 7, 8, and 9, 2014 Judgment on : July 16, 2014 ASHIM KUMAR BANERJEE, ACJ. This appeal would relate to an order refusing to admit a winding up petition filed on behalf of the appellant as against the respondents. The parties had commercial relationship under which the appellant acted as a carrier of the respondents products over a long period of time. The parties would say, it would be for 6-7 yeaRs.According to the app...
Mihijam Vanaspati Ltd. Vs. Maersk Line India Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
GA No.725 of 2014 CS No.244 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE MIHIJAM VANASPATI LTD.Versus MAERs.LINE INDIA PVT.LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE I.P.MUKERJ.Date : 16th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.S.K.Das, Advocate Ms.Nilanjana Adhya, Advocate Mr.R.K.Chowdhury, Advocate Mr.T.Saraf, Advocate The Court: The plaintiff is in breach of orders of this court directing them to discover their documents. Mr.Das, learned Advocate for the defendant, seeks dismissal of the suit on this ground. Mr.Chowdhury, learned Advocate for the plaintiff, prays for further time to discover documents. In their counter claim the defendant has prayed for a decree for Rs.1,99,94,911/-. The plaintiff has not filed any additional written statement, till date. On this ground, Mr.Das wants the counter claim to proceed exparte as against the plaintiff. No doubt the Code of Civil Procedure provides for dismissal of a suit for non-prosecution for non-discovery of documen...
Pks Limited Vs. the State Trading Corporation of India Limited and anr ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
GA No.2443 of 2013 CS No.259 of 2012 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL SIDE PKS Limited Versus The State Trading Corporation of India Limited & Anr. B E F O R E: The Honble Justice DEBANGSU BASAK Dated, the 14th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Suman Dutt, Adv.Mr.Sankarsan Sarkar, Adv.Mr.Sukrit Mukherjee, Adv.Mr.S.Abedin, Adv.For PKS LTD.Mr.Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr.Adv.Mr.S.Ahammed, Adv.For the Defendant No.2. The Court:- The application of the defendant no.2 was for rejection of plaint on the grounds that the claim made in the suit was barred by the laws of limitation, the transactions pleaded in the plaint were covered by an arbitration agreement and that there was no privity of the contract between the defendant no.2 and the plaintiff. Mr.Bikash Ranjan Bhattacharya, Sr.Advocate for the defendant no.2, contended that the claim of the plaintiff against the defendant no.2 was barred by the laws of limitation as would appear from the pleadings i...
Steel Authority of India Ltd. Vs. M/S. T.D. Kumar and Bros. Pvt. Ltd. ...
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction Original Side Before: The Honble Justice Debangsu Basak C.S.No.197 of 1978 Steel Authority of India LTD.versus M/S.T.D.Kumar & Bros. PVT.LTD.& ORS.For the plaintiff : Mr.Pramit Roy, Sr.Advocate Mr.Arik Banerjee, Advocate Mr.Rajib Mullick, Advocate For the Defendant No.4 : MRS.Vijaya Bhatia, Advocate Mr.Ganesh Prasad Shaw, Advocate Heard on : July 07, 2014 Judgment on : July 16, 2014 DEBANGSU BASAK, J.:- The plaintiff was a manufacturer and producer of iron and steel materials. In July/August 1974 the original plaintiff entered into an agreement with the Defendant No.1 by which the Defendant No.1 was appointed as the handling and storage contractor for the original plaintiff on various terms and conditions. In consideration of such agreement between the original plaintiff and the Defendant No.1, the Defendant Nos.2 and 3 agreed to indemnify the original plaintiff to the extent of a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- against all loses...
Banwarilal Agarwal and anr. Vs. Basudeo Agarwalla and ors.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET GA No.2561 of 2013 CS No.308 of 2013 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction ORIGINAL SIDE BANWARILAL AGARWAL & ANR. Versus BASUDEO AGARWALLA & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK Date : 16th July, 2014. Appearance: Mr.Abhrajit Mitra, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sudeep Palchowdhury, Adv.The Court : - In a suit for declaration that a Memorandum of Understanding dated February 10, 2011 be declared null and void and for cancellation of a credit sanction advice and for other reliefs, the plaintiff applied for an injunction restraining the defendants and particularly, defendant no.6 from giving any effect or further effect to any security or any personal guarantees given by the defendant no.6 pursuant to and/or in connection with the Memorandum of Understanding dated February 10, 2011. It was submitted on behalf of the plaintiff that pursuant to a Memorandum of Understanding dated February 10, 2011 the plaintiffs were to be introduced as a shareholder in a co...
C. I. T. Kolkata Ii Vs. Warren Tea Ltd.
Court: Kolkata
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
ORDER SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax) ORIGINAL SIDE ITA No.721 of 2004 C.I.T. KOLKATA - II Versus WARREN TEA LTD.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE GIRISH CHANDRA GUPTA The Hon'ble JUSTICE DR MRINAL KANTI CHAUDHURI Date : 16th July, 2014. Mr.S.N.Dutt, Adv.for the Appellant Mr.J.P.Khaitan, Sr.Adv.Mr.Sanjoy Bhowmick, Adv.and Mr.C.S.Das, Adv.for the Respondent The Court : The appeal is directed against the judgment and order 14th May, 2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissing an appeal preferred by the Revenue. The contention of the Revenue, briefly stated, was that the benefit under section 33(A)(B) could not have been advanced to the assessee and, therefore, proceedings under section 154 were taken. The learned Tribunal has on merits held that the benefit under section 33 (A)(B) was, in fact, not available to the assessee, but the learned Tribunal following the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of T.S.Balaram versus Volkart Brothers ...
- ‹ Prev
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- Next ›
- Last »